The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation Part 224

Section 10, penalizing "any employer subject to the provisions of this act" who should "threaten any employee with loss of employment * * *

because of his members.h.i.+p in * * * a labor corporation, a.s.sociation, or organization" (the act being applicable "to any common carrier * * *

engaged in the transportation of pa.s.sengers, or property * * * from one State * * * to another State * * *," etc.), _held_ an infringement of the Fifth Amendment, not supported by the commerce clause.

Adair _v._ United States, 208 U.S. 161 (January 27, 1908).

31. Act of June 13, 1898 (30 Stat. 451, 459).

Stamp tax on foreign bills of lading, _held_ a tax on exports in violation of article I, section 9.

Fairbank _v._ United States, 181 U.S. 283 (April 15, 1901).

32. Same (30 Stat. 451, 460).

Tax on charter parties, as applied to s.h.i.+pments exclusively from ports in United States to foreign ports, _held_ a tax on exports in violation of article I, section 9.

United States _v._ Hvoslef, 237 U.S. 1 (March 22, 1915).

33. Same (30 Stat. 451, 461).

Tax on policies of marine insurance, as applied to insurance during voyage to foreign ports, _held_ a tax on exports in violation of article I, section 9.

Thames and Mersey Marine Insurance Co. _v._ United States, 237 U.S. 19 (April 5, 1915).

34. Act of June 6, 1900 (31 Stat. 359, sec. 171).

Section of the Alaska Code providing for a six-person jury in trials for misdemeanors, _held_ repugnant to the Sixth Amendment, requiring "jury"

trial of crimes.

Ra.s.smussen _v._ United States, 197 U.S. 516 (April 10, 1905).

35. Act of March 3, 1901 (31 Stat. 1341, sec. 935).

Section of the District of Columbia Code granting the same right of appeal, in criminal cases, to the United States or the District of Columbia as to the defendant, but providing that a verdict was not to be set aside for error found in rulings during trial, _held_ an attempt to take an advisory opinion, contrary to article III, section 2.

United States _v._ Evans, 213 U.S. 297 (April 19, 1909).

36. Act of June 11, 1906 (34 Stat. 232, ch. 3073).

Act providing that "every common carrier engaged in trade or commerce in the District of Columbia * * * or between the several States * * * shall be liable to any of its employees * * * for all damages which may result from the negligence of any of its officers * * * or by reason of any defect * * * due to its negligence in its cars, engines * * * roadbed", etc., _held_ not supportable under article I, section 8, clause 3 as applied to employees engaged in moving trains in interstate commerce.

Employers' Liability Cases, 207 U.S. 463 (January 6, 1908).

[The act was upheld as to the District of Columbia in Hyde _v._ Southern R. Co., 31 App. D.C. 466 [1908]; and as to Territories, in El Paso and Northeastern R. Co. _v._ Gutierrez, 215 U.S. 87 [1909].]

37. Act of June 16, 1906 (34 Stat. 269, sec. 2).

Provision of Oklahoma Enabling Act restricting relocation of the State capital prior to 1913, _held_ not supportable by article IV, section 3, authorizing admission of new States.

Coyle _v._ Oklahoma (Smith), 221 U.S. 559 (May 29, 1911).

38. Act of February 20, 1907 (34 Stat. 899, sec. 3).

Provision in the Immigration Act of 1907 penalizing "whoever * * * shall keep, maintain, control, support, or harbor in any house or other place, for the purpose of prost.i.tution * * * any alien woman or girl, within 3 years after she shall have entered the United States," _held_ an exercise of police power not within the control of Congress over immigration (whether drawn from the commerce clause or based on inherent sovereignty).

Keller _v._ United States, 213 U.S. 138 (April 5, 1909).

39. Act of March 1, 1907 (34 Stat. 1028).

Provisions authorizing certain Indians "to inst.i.tute their suits in the Court of Claims to determine the validity of any acts of Congress pa.s.sed since * * * 1902, insofar as said acts * * * attempt to increase or extend the restrictions upon alienation * * * of allotments of lands of Cherokee citizens * * *," and giving a right of appeal to the Supreme Court, _held_ an attempt to enlarge the judicial power restricted by article III, section 2, to cases and controversies.

Muskrat _v._ United States and Brown and Gritts _v._ United States, 219 U.S. 346 (January 23, 1911).

40. Act of May 27, 1908 (35 Stat. 313, sec. 4).

Provision making locally taxable "all land [of Indians of the Five Civilized Tribes] from which restrictions have been or shall be removed," _held_ a violation of the Fifth Amendment, in view of the Atoka Agreement, embodied in the Curtis Act of June 28, 1898, providing tax-exemption for allotted lands while t.i.tle in original allottee, not exceeding 21 years.

Choate _v._ Trapp, 224 U.S. 665 (May 13, 1912).

41. Act of August 19, 1911 (37 Stat. 28).

A proviso in section 8 of the Federal Corrupt Practices Act fixing a maximum authorized expenditure by a candidate for Senator "in any campaign for his nomination and election," as applied to a primary election, _held_ not supported by article I, section 4, giving Congress power to regulate the manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives.

Newberry _v._ United States, 256 U.S. 232 (May 2, 1921).

42. Act of June 18, 1912 (37 Stat. 136, sec. 8).

Part of section 8 giving the Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia (proceeding upon information) concurrent jurisdiction of desertion cases (which were, by law, misdemeanors punishable by fine or imprisonment in the workhouse at hard labor for 1 year), _held_ invalid under the Fifth Amendment, which gives right to presentment by a grand jury in case of infamous crimes.

United States _v._ Moreland, 258 U.S. 433 (April 17, 1922).

43. Act of March 4, 1913 (37 Stat. 988, part of par. 64).

Provision of the District of Columbia Public Utility Commission Act authorizing appeal to the United States Supreme Court from decrees of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals modifying valuation decisions of the Utilities Commission, _held_ an attempt to extend the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to cases not strictly judicial within the meaning of article III, section 2.

Keller _v._ Potomac Electric Power Co. et al., 261 U.S. 428 (April 9, 1923).

44. Act of September 1, 1916 (39 Stat. 675, ch. 432, entire).

The original Child Labor Law, providing "that no producer * * * shall s.h.i.+p * * * in interstate commerce * * * any article or commodity the product of any mill * * * in which within 30 days prior to the removal of such product therefrom children under the age of 14 years have been employed or permitted to work more than 8 hours in any day, or more than 6 days in any week * * *," _held_ not within the commerce power of Congress.

Hammer _v._ Dagenhart, 247 U.S. 251 (June 3, 1918).

45. Act of September 8, 1916 (39 Stat. 757, sec. 2(a) in part).

Provision of the income-tax law of 1916, that a "stock dividend shall be considered income, to the amount of its cash value," _held_ invalid (in spite of the Sixteenth Amendment) as an attempt to tax something not actually income, without regard to apportionment under article I, section 2, clause 3.

Eisner _v._ Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (March 8, 1920).

46. Act of October 3, 1917 (40 Stat. 302, secs. 4, 303, secs. 201 and 333, sec. 1206 (amending 39 Stat. 765, sec. 10)); and